I just saw that REM has told the RNC to quit using their song, "Losing my religion."

If an artists creates something and puts it out there for the mass market, how can they still have control after it's left? Doesn't that violate the freedom of use? I think the problem here is that REM doesn't support the R2 crowd, or RNC and that is why they don't wish to be associated with them. BUT, they did make a product for mass public use, and I don't think it's appropriate for them to tell someone they can't do something just because they don't agree with it. If you don't like something don't put it out there right?

I'm not trying to create a censorship firestorm, but this seems like a form of reverse censorship, and I understand that it is probably written in the small print of the copyright, but don't copyrights have a shelf life too? So if LMR came out in the 90's it's almost 20 years old and the copyright should be expired right? My understanding with that is that a copyright last for 7 years and then you need to resubmit for it. Anyone care to clarify?

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

September 8th, 2012, 7:52 am

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2833

Re: Quick Question

WarEr4Christ wrote:

I just saw that REM has told the RNC to quit using their song, "Losing my religion."

If an artists creates something and puts it out there for the mass market, how can they still have control after it's left? Doesn't that violate the freedom of use? I think the problem here is that REM doesn't support the R2 crowd, or RNC and that is why they don't wish to be associated with them. BUT, they did make a product for mass public use, and I don't think it's appropriate for them to tell someone they can't do something just because they don't agree with it. If you don't like something don't put it out there right?

I'm not trying to create a censorship firestorm, but this seems like a form of reverse censorship, and I understand that it is probably written in the small print of the copyright, but don't copyrights have a shelf life too? So if LMR came out in the 90's it's almost 20 years old and the copyright should be expired right? My understanding with that is that a copyright last for 7 years and then you need to resubmit for it. Anyone care to clarify?

Copyright for music is the same for all copyright law in the US. It is life of author plus 70 years. And exclusive rights belong to the author meaning they have the right to tell anyone they can't use it.

September 8th, 2012, 8:39 am

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3039Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Quick Question

So if I've bought your product, and paid the money to purchase it, and then choose to use it as my theme song, you still have control over what I do even though you've been paid for your services?

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

September 8th, 2012, 10:57 am

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2833

Re: Quick Question

Yes, because you purchased a limited license, you don't own the song. If you bought a song specifically written for you, then that's a different story. TV, Radio stations... they all have to pay to play the songs on the radio. It's how the artists make money. CD sales only account for a small percentage. Royalties are where it's at. You know those pesky legalese terms inside the CD cases.. Read them sometime

Copyright law covers anything created outside the realm of work for hire, even without filing a copyright. If I take a picture, post it and you start using it, I could sue because I own the intellectual property rights to it. Filing the paperwork would guarantee a win, but it's just another government agency that's redundant. Copyright starts at the date of creation. It just makes things easier to defend in court because of the paperwork.

September 8th, 2012, 11:08 am

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3039Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Quick Question

Gotcha, I figured it was covered, I just thought that the possibility existed that it could be used once you'd purchased it that's all.

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

September 8th, 2012, 11:15 am

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2833

Re: Quick Question

It can be used in a personal setting like a bbq or family gathering, but any public event like a conference needs permission.

September 8th, 2012, 11:19 am

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10019Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Quick Question

If I'm someone that is part of the Republican party, I would pay someone to write a song with the line "REM sucks" in it, over and over again. REM can complain all that they want, but it doesn't necessarily mean the song is about them.

Besides...REM does suck. I hate artists who feel that they have the right or invitation to tell people how to vote. GO PHUCK YOURSELF MICHAEL STIPES!!!!!!!!

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

September 8th, 2012, 12:40 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Quick Question

njroar wrote:

WarEr4Christ wrote:

I just saw that REM has told the RNC to quit using their song, "Losing my religion."

If an artists creates something and puts it out there for the mass market, how can they still have control after it's left? Doesn't that violate the freedom of use? I think the problem here is that REM doesn't support the R2 crowd, or RNC and that is why they don't wish to be associated with them. BUT, they did make a product for mass public use, and I don't think it's appropriate for them to tell someone they can't do something just because they don't agree with it. If you don't like something don't put it out there right?

I'm not trying to create a censorship firestorm, but this seems like a form of reverse censorship, and I understand that it is probably written in the small print of the copyright, but don't copyrights have a shelf life too? So if LMR came out in the 90's it's almost 20 years old and the copyright should be expired right? My understanding with that is that a copyright last for 7 years and then you need to resubmit for it. Anyone care to clarify?

Copyright for music is the same for all copyright law in the US. It is life of author plus 70 years. And exclusive rights belong to the author meaning they have the right to tell anyone they can't use it.

Copyright law doesn't prevent other people from playing their song. If the RNC wants to have a band or orchestra play their music REM can't do anything about it other than what they're doing, requesting that they stop and making them look stupid for continuing to use it.

September 8th, 2012, 2:35 pm

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2833

Re: Quick Question

wjb21ndtown wrote:

njroar wrote:

WarEr4Christ wrote:

I just saw that REM has told the RNC to quit using their song, "Losing my religion."

If an artists creates something and puts it out there for the mass market, how can they still have control after it's left? Doesn't that violate the freedom of use? I think the problem here is that REM doesn't support the R2 crowd, or RNC and that is why they don't wish to be associated with them. BUT, they did make a product for mass public use, and I don't think it's appropriate for them to tell someone they can't do something just because they don't agree with it. If you don't like something don't put it out there right?

I'm not trying to create a censorship firestorm, but this seems like a form of reverse censorship, and I understand that it is probably written in the small print of the copyright, but don't copyrights have a shelf life too? So if LMR came out in the 90's it's almost 20 years old and the copyright should be expired right? My understanding with that is that a copyright last for 7 years and then you need to resubmit for it. Anyone care to clarify?

Copyright for music is the same for all copyright law in the US. It is life of author plus 70 years. And exclusive rights belong to the author meaning they have the right to tell anyone they can't use it.

Copyright law doesn't prevent other people from playing their song. If the RNC wants to have a band or orchestra play their music REM can't do anything about it other than what they're doing, requesting that they stop and making them look stupid for continuing to use it.

Actually it does, except that it's not worth the hassle of a lawsuit, so it's never sued for. It definitely falls under copyright law though. Cover bands escape it, because the cost of a public performance license is easy to get and extremely cheap. A lawsuit would cost more than they would get fined. Big events such as the RNC and DNC cost a lot more, so while R.E.M. might look stupid, it's within their legal right. Purchase of a song is a private license for private use only. Doesn't matter if you're a private company or a non-profit, if you use a song at an event, you could be held in violation for not getting a license for it.

It's laid out pretty plainly in the Federal Copyright Act.

September 8th, 2012, 5:18 pm

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3039Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Quick Question

OK, since I started this thread I'm going to change the topic because I don't want to start another thread for the window when this kind of keeps in line with the Quick Question theme.

1. Has anyone seen Hunger Games?

2. What are your thoughts?

3. I have walked away with a perspective that I think most of you would agree that I would have, but it's really hard NOT to see it as such.

As I watched the movie, based upon all the hype and attention many friends had said about it, I was struck by a few key things.

The Capital, or Central Government, depended upon the "districts" to provide their needs. The population of the Capital was nothing more than a bunch of wealthy, do as I say not as I do, liberal, homosexual, metrosexual, arts crowd, that is best represented by the "Liberal" crowd today. (Notice the electrified fences that didn't work, the didn't do a good job protecting their borders either.)

However, the districts were populated by hardworking, families who were just trying to survive, and it was up to them to provide for the needs of the Government. Those who supported the system or lived in the Capital, lived well, those who didn't starved, struggled, and had to offer up their young for "hunger games."

As I said, this is MY perspective, but I'm interested in how others saw it, especially those who are more liberal. In regards to the discription of the Capital/Liberals I was NOT trying to be offensive in my discription, as much as I was trying to be more realist. In truth, most who live the alternative lifestyles generally associate with the Liberal crowd. And the costumes and manuerisms of the people really illustrated that.

So please discuss, I'm really interested to see other perspectives.

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

September 18th, 2012, 12:54 pm

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3039Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Quick Question

Huh? I'd of thought this would have people crawling all over it, guess not!

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

September 19th, 2012, 3:07 pm

regularjoe12

Off. Coordinator – Joe Lombardi

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 3955Location: Davison Mi

Re: Quick Question

havnt seen it....yet

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

September 19th, 2012, 3:16 pm

LionsFan4Life

Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)

Joined: October 30th, 2004, 12:30 pmPosts: 2205Location: Austin, TX

Re: Quick Question

I haven't seen Hunger Games either, but I'll get around to it eventually.

_________________

NEVER GIVE UP!

September 19th, 2012, 4:03 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12278

Re: Quick Question

I've seen it; it was ok.

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

September 19th, 2012, 4:21 pm

WarEr4Christ

QB Coach

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pmPosts: 3039Location: Elkhart, In.

Re: Quick Question

Ok Wags, since you've seen it, could you see any of the parallels that I was talking about?

As far as the movie goes, I thought it was okay too! Not worth all the hype, but okay.

_________________2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."